I have been saddened and angered at a number of incidents involving blatant racism in our community. Within the last few months I am aware of at least three separate occasions where words of hate that should never be repeated were directed at persons of color in an attempt to discriminate, intimidate, or otherwise make them feel like less than.

In November it was directed towards students at LVC, a few weeks ago a friend and neighbor was harassed with the same language while out for a run, and most recently a local business that refused service to someone because of the color of their skin.

As the pastor at Annville United Methodist Church, these are all incidents which happened within a block of where I serve God and my community. I am deeply troubled by this especially when recent political events are cited as justification. Racism is not a partisan issue.

As a pastor I typically don't comment on political issues because I have church members across the political spectrum and I truly believe that God isn't defined by political party. However, this isn't political. This is about respecting our neighbors worth and humanity.

The God I serve promotes equality, justice, and love and calls us to speak out against incidents of injustice and oppression. It shouldn't matter who you voted for.

This is wrong and it should be made clear that it has no place here. All community members should condemn the words and actions of those that seek to dehumanize others because of the color of their skin. Our community is better than that.

- Dan Lebo, Annville

America's school bully

America’s schools are failing. The United States ranks 40th in math, 25th in science, and 24th in reading behind countries like Estonia—despite spending 31 percent more on education per pupil than the OECD average.

Why? Because DeVos believes in school choice, merit-based pay, and tenure reform—all of which threaten Big Labor’s public-school monopoly. In her home state of Michigan, charter schools consistently outperform traditional public schools, providing students with two months of additional gains in reading and math” every year. Stanford University research shows that “charter schools have significantly better results…for minority students who are in poverty.”

Climate change is real” (Jan 19) hopes clean energy will grow, even under our new president.
There’s reason for hope:

Trump’s promised to create 25 million jobs with better trade deals. However, since 2000 “trade accounted for only 13% of lost U.S. factory jobs. 88% of the jobs were taken by robots” (Fortune). So, Trump will soon learn that the jobs he promised can’t be created through better trade deals.

Trump and the GOP Congress can make that happen fast with a conservative, market-driven, revenue-neutral form of carbon pricing that’s been successful in British Columbia for eight years now: It’s resulted in lower energy bills, lower taxes and more jobs (The Economist). No government regulations, no new taxes, no new bureaucracy, and no subsidies make this a policy the GOP can accept.

It’s called “carbon fee-and-dividend” : An annually-increasing carbon pollution tax is paid by every fossil fuel corporation directly to every taxpayer in equal monthly “carbon dividend” checks. As the fee makes oil, gas and coal increasingly more expensive than solar and wind energy, people who use their “dividend” checks to buy cheaper clean energy make a profit. That’s projected to increase US GDP $75-80 billion annually (citizensclimatelobby.org).

Jerry Shenk, in his January 14 column on climate science, claims climate scientists and “power-hungry politicians” are extrapolating false data, spuriously adopting “narrative-friendly” scientific hypotheses, and engaging in other unethical practices. These are serious charges, so it comes as some surprise that Mr. Shenk never tells us who these dishonest scientists and politicians are, or gives us a single example of a time when any of this misconduct actually occurred. Instead, throughout Mr. Shenk’s column we are treated to a steady stream of innuendo, name-calling, and sneers.

Indeed, what we are given in this column is not so much an argument as a prolonged insult—designed, it would seem, to draw an emotional reaction out of readers before they’ve had a chance to think. One wonders: Is this really all Mr. Shenk has in his case against climate science?

But it gets even worse. The idea that scientists are colluding to rig the science is, well, nutty. Does anyone really think that thousands of scientists around the world over the past 40 years have been conspiring en masse to skew the science and commit fraud? It boggles the mind.

Let’s remind ourselves of the facts. That climate change is occurring is the considered opinion of thousands of climatologists who have been doing research on this topic since the 1970’s. Indeed, there is a strong consensus that the threats which climate change pose are real and that failing to act quickly to cut carbon emissions will be catastrophic. We now know that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is 45% higher than it was before the advent of the industrial era, and that carbon dioxide does trap heat. So, given all this, it’s not hard to see why the earth’s temperature might be rising, and why scientists are concerned. And if scientists are concerned, the public should be, too.

The readers of this newspaper have a decision to make. They can listen to the shrill and dishonest Mr. Shenk, who smears people without evidence, or to the thousands of thoughtful, hardworking scientists who actually present evidence to back up their claims.